[2025:RJ-JP:17333] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 122/2022 Madanlal Saini S/o Bholaram Saini, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Kanaka Ki Dhani, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Mahesh Kumar Saini S/o Bholaram Saini, R/o Kanaka Ki Dhani, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan). 2. Dropti D/o Bholaram W/o Kishanlal, R/o Kanaka Ki Dhani, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan). At Present Piplwali Dhani, Sainipura, Dundlod, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arun Singh Shekhawat, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meeta Pareek, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 24/04/2025 This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant No.1 (for short ‘the defendant No.1’) under Section 115 CPC against the order dated 13.04.2022 passed by Senior Civil Judge, Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu in Civil Suit No.35/2021, whereby the application filed by the defendant No.1 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the defendant No.1 submits that respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for partition as well as permanent injunction against the defendants in which defendant No.1 filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC that plaintiff had not mentioned the valuation of the suit. So, [2025:RJ-JP:17333] (2 of 2) [CR-122/2022] on account of non valuation, the suit was not maintainable. The plaintiff had also not paid the requisite court fees. So, suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed, but trial court vide order dated 13.04.2022 dismissed the application filed by the defendant No.1. So, petition filed by the defendant No.1 be allowed and the order dated 13.04.2022 passed by the trial court be set aside. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant No.1 and submits that plaintiff filed the present suit for partition and permanent injunction, so, he had filed the suit on requisite court fees. So, trial court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendant No.1. So, present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant No.1 as well as learned counsel for the plaintiff. Trial court while dismissing the application filed by the defendant No.1 clearly mentioned that suit was properly valued and sufficient court fees was filed. So, in my considered opinion, present petition filed by the defendant No.1 deserves to be dismissed. The Civil Revision Petition filed by the defendant No.1 stands dismissed. However, defendant No.1 is at liberty to take his all objections in the written statement, if so advised. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin /77